Colorado

In 2008-2009, we saw the collapse of the American economy, with the biggest banks and Wall Street firms guilty of causing it.

None of those banks or Wall Street firms paid a price for their illegal, unethical activities, which destroyed the economy in a manner unseen since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Under Barack Obama, the Dodd-Frank Law was passed to insure accountability of banks and Wall Street, so that what happened a decade ago would never happen again.

But now, under a Republican Congress, the action to destroy the Dodd_Frank Law is occurring, and has been assisted by 17 Democratic Senators, and only with at least 10 of them, could such action to eliminate Dodd-Frank have moved forward.

It is shocking to see 17 of the 49 Democrats and Independents in the Senate become turncoats who effectively joined in this evil act, and all 17 need to be called out and denounced.

The problem is too many politicians gain campaign contributions from the big banks and Wall Street, so it compromises their ability to represent their states in a proper manner.

The problem is that if these Democrats are repudiated, it would only aid Republicans in possibly gaining their seats, so the issue is that it is preferable to have Democrats who will support the party on many issues, even if not on this issue.

Liberals and progressives will argue that they should be “primaried”, but the reality is that would only help promote more Republican senators, so we are in an area that could be described as “between the devil and the deep blue sea”!

But we must at least list these 17 Senators, so we are all aware of their “treason”:

Michael Bennet of Colorado
Tom Carper of Delaware
Chris Coons of Delaware
Joe Donnelly of Indiana
Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire
Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota
Doug Jones of Alabama
Tim Kaine of Virginia
Angus King of Maine (Independent)
Joe Manchin of West Virginia
Claire McCaskill of Missouri
Bill Nelson of Florida
Gary Peters of Michigan
Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire
Debbie Stabenow of Michigan
Jon Tester of Montana
Mark Warner of Virginia

Of these 10, only Carper, Kaine and King are in states that went to the Democrats. The other seven were Republican states, and makes the task of keeping their seats ever more difficult.

Of the 17 Senators, only 8 of them, those from Colorado, Delaware (2), New Hampshire (2), Virginia (2), and Maine came from states carried by Hillary Clinton in 2016.

So, sadly, we do not have the privilege and ability to call for the defeat of the ten who are running this year, but even true of the seven who are not running, as they are still better than Republicans to hold the seats.

Otherwise, the Democrats will lose all chance of ever gaining a majority, if they stick to an extreme progressive view of who is acceptable as a Democratic member of the US Senate.

However, one point should be made clear, that none of this list above should ever be considered seriously for President, with the reality that only the two Virginia Senators, Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, are even talked about at all as potential nominees.

Tim Kaine may have run for Vice President with Hillary Clinton in 2016, but his support of repeal of the Dodd Frank Law should disqualify him and Warner for future Presidential consideration.

The Democrats have two women Governors, and six other women running for Governor in the 2018 midterm elections.

Gina Raimondo in Rhode Island and Kate Brown in Oregon are running for reelection, and both would be favored to keep their Governorships in strongly Democratic states.

The six candidates have a more difficult road to travel, as they will have male challengers and opponents, and some of them in states won by Donald Trump.

Gwen Graham, daughter of former Florida Senator Bob Graham, will have challengers and opponents in the Sunshine State, which is strongly Republican in state elections.

Stacey Abrams is African American, and running in Georgia, also heavily Republican in recent decades.

Gretchen Whitmer is running in Michigan, a state that Donald Trump won by a small margin in 2016.

Cary Kennedy in Colorado, Michelle Lujan Grisham in New Mexico, and African American wife of Congressman Elijah Cummings, Maya Rockeymoore Cummings in Maryland, have the advantage of running in Democratic states, but will have to fight off male opponents in the primaries.

None of the six women are guaranteed even nomination at this point, as primaries will decide that.

Hillary Clinton’s new memoir on her Presidential campaign is out, and the question is whether it will destroy a possible future candidacy for President, or promote it.

Clinton certainly blames herself for some of the actions and statements that doomed her, but also places a lot of blame on others, including former FBI Director James Comey; her rival for the nomination, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont; Today Show Host Matt Lauer, who moderated a debate that she feels was poorly handled by him; and of course, Donald Trump.

She points out her belief that there was definite Russian collusion for Donald Trump; makes clear her disgust at Trump’s tactics during the campaign; makes clear her belief that Trump was and is totally unqualified on experience and judgment to be our President; and tells us she is not going anywhere into the distance, but will continue to speak up on issues and personalities, including on Donald Trump.

Clinton recognizes that millions love her and voted for her, and gave her a 2.85 million popular vote margin, but that millions others hate her with a passion, and that sexism played a major role in her defeat, along with disgust by many at her husband, Bill Clinton, even though millions of others admire and support her husband and his Presidency in the 1990s.

Clinton informs us that while she will continue to be part of public discourse, she will NOT run for President again, which seems totally sensible and rational.

While she has run twice already, there is no desire to match Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan, who ran and lost three times; or Thomas E. Dewey and Adlai Stevenson, who ran and lost two times.

It is indeed time for fresh leadership, and so the idea of Bernie Sanders at age 79 in 2020 running for President is a terrible idea, and even Joe Biden, who this blogger loves, and believes that he would have defeated Donald Trump had he been the nominee, running again at age 78 in 2020, is not a good way to go.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is also talked about, as with Sanders and Hillary Clinton, but being in the 70s by 2020 makes her NOT a good choice, and she is also extremely controversial, and would be unlikely to gain any more support in the proper places and states to be elected President, because if anything, she is more vehement and more controversial to many than Sanders or Clinton.

Again, we need NEW leadership, with a preference for the YOUNGER part of the above group.

We must realize that Donald Trump is not really a Republican or a conservative, and is impossible to figure out what his agenda is, so that means that there will be a “firewall” of Republicans in the US Senate, who at least in some cases, can be added to Democratic opposition in the Senate, and give some hope that there will be control over Trump appointments and initiatives over the next few years.

Not all of the above list will cooperate and collaborate together on all issues, but they all seem to be likely to fight Trump on some issues, and if three or four work together with a united Democratic Party in the Senate, Trump will be unable to accomplish all his goals, and he is likely to bitterly denounce these Republicans, and cause, by his language, more stalemate and gridlock, and prevent the most grievous nominees and parts of his agenda.

The most likely to oppose Trump are the following: Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Jeff Flake, and Rob Portman in that order.

However, Ben Sasse and Mike Lee, as strong conservatives, are also likely to try to limit Trump Administration goals if they find them objectionable.

The others–Dan Sullivan, Cory Gardner, Dean Heller, Pat Toomey, Lamar Alexander, and Shelley Moore Capito–may, occasionally, join with the members of this group.

Remember that seven of this group—Murkowski, McCain, Rubio, Paul, Portman, Toomey, and Lee have a new six year term, so are not threatened by Trump as far as their Senate seat is concerned.

Only Flake and Heller face election contests in 2018, while the other seven –Sullivan, Gardner, Collins, Sasse, Graham, Alexander, and Capito face election in 2020.

So 16 Senators out of 52 Republicans, fully one third, could stand in the way of Donald Trump, and if he went too far in abuse of his powers, could, potentially, join in a possible move to promote impeachment, although even if all 48 Democrats joined in, would still fall short of the 67 needed to convict and remove him by three votes.

Democrats are rightfully very gloomy one month after the election, with the close vote but loss in three “Blue” states–Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

But when one looks down the road, so to speak, the long range future of the party is bright, since the growth of Hispanic-Latino population, and even the Asian American population, is going to have the effect of changing “Red” states to “Blue” over the next decade.

North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, and Arizona are moving toward a major change in their population, which cannot be reversed, and the Electoral College advantage will definitely be in favor of the Democrats, as a result.

North Carolina with 15 electoral votes, Georgia with 16 electoral votes, Texas with 38 electoral votes, and Arizona with 11 electoral votes, are all growing and becoming more population of these racial minorities, and all four states will have a growth in electoral votes after the Census of 2020 and reapportionment of seats in the House of Representatives.

As it is now, these four states have 80 electoral votes, but will have a few more in the 2020s, more than enough to overcome the 46 electoral votes of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

The likelihood of any other of the remaining 15 solid “Blue” states, numbering 15 of the 20 states Hillary Clinton won, going “Red” are extremely unlikely—as the five New England states, four Middle Atlantic states and DC, two Midwestern states, and four Pacific Coast states are all rock solid. The 5 “swing” states that still went to Hillary Clinton–New Hampshire, Virginia, Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico–are also extremely unlikely to swing “Red”, as they did not give in to the sway of Donald Trump. The three western states are becoming more Hispanic and Asian American every year, and Virginia is influenced by its growing Northern Virginia suburbs of the nation’s capital, and New Hampshire by its proximity to Boston. Only New Hampshire might go to the Republicans, but the other four seem certain to remain in the Democratic camp, so New Hampshire with 4 electoral votes is not significant enough to worry about.

So the future is bright, but meanwhile, progressives have to build state parties and win seats in both houses of Congress, a tall order in the short run, but with the hope that long term, the prognosis is much better.

Remember that the three states taken by Trump, all in the Rust Belt, are likely to lose some seats in reapportionment, while the growing states likely to go “Blue” are all to gain seats, so the Electoral College future strongly favors the Democrats.

Just now, if one imagines those four “Red” states going Democratic in the future, the electoral vote of 232 for Hillary Clinton would become 312 with the 80 electoral votes!

And of course, do not write off that Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania could revert to the Democratic camp, as the Trump wins were very small margin, less than one percent of all votes cast in the three states, and less than 80,000 votes in total!

There are growing indications that much of the Mountain and Desert West part of America is going “Blue” for the future, following the Pacific Coast states of California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii.

Already, New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada are leaning in that direction, and it seems inevitable that Arizona will join that group of states soon, and also Montana may join in that move.

The states of Wyoming, Idaho and Utah are less likely to do so, but growing Hispanic-Latino and Asian American population in much of the Mountain and Desert West makes Democratic gains in both Presidential elections and state elections much more likely over the next decade.

In the controversy over Hispanic-Latino population growth, many might be surprised to learn that Asian American population is growing at a faster clip in the West, and just as Hispanics and Latinos tend to do, Asian Americans–whether Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Filipino, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi–as well as others, tends to vote Democratic.

The nativism appeal of Donald Trump and the general Republican party line is a warning sign to these Asian American groups, and history reminds us of the discrimination visited in the Western states against particularly Chinese and Japanese immigrants and citizens in the American past.

With all of the Presidential primaries and caucuses, it turns out that “Super Delegates” in the Democratic Party, and “Unbound Delegates” in the Republican Party could overrule all of the election results in the two major parties!

“Super Delegates” are several hundred delegates, who are party officers and elected members of Congress and in the state governments, and right now, it is clear that the vast majority favor Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.

“Unbound Delegates” are about 200 delegates in a few states, including North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, and Pennsylvania, that under Republican state party rules, can go to the convention unbound, no matter what the state voters in those states have voted, and they are enough, along with “Marco Rubio” delegates, to create the possibility of preventing Donald Trump from reaching 1,237 delegates, the majority needed for nomination.

The problem with these different kinds of delegates is they can cause total disillusionment in voters who feel their vote has meant nothing, and that the “Establishment” in both parties is working to undermine the revolt against them, led by Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

One thing is clear: Both parties and their conventions will be far from boring this summer in Cleveland for the Republicans and Philadelphia for the Democrats!

One group that has not gained much attention in the fury of the Presidential Election campaign of 2016 are Asian Americans, the fastest growing group in America.

With a little more than 5 percent of the population, and rapidly growing in Florida, Virginia, and Nevada, and already substantial in New York, California, Illinois, Maryland, Washington State, Oregon, Arizona, Colorado and other states, Asian Americans are very likely to play a pivotal role in who wins the Presidency.

Asian Americans could also affect Senate and House races, as they are very likely to vote, and the vast majority have tended to vote Democratic in recent years. The growing numbers of Asian Americans in Central and South Florida, Northern Virginia, and the Las Vegas metropolitan area are likely to insure that those three key swing states should influence the Democratic candidate’s likelihood of winning the Presidency.

Many do not realize how many different Asian groups are included–including Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Filipino, as well as those from India, Pakistan and other nations in Asia. Very accomplished and very dedicated to their civic duty to participate in the electoral battle is a great way to describe Asian Americans.

And the history of Asian Americans is always in the background–particularly the banning of Chinese immigration from 1882-1943, and the mistreatment of Japanese Americans in California early in the 20th century, and the forced internment of 110,000 Japanese Americans in World War II.

Asian Americans know that they must fight against nativism, racism, and religious discrimination, including those of Muslim faith.

So the Republican Party has a major problem in drawing Asian American support, with 73 percent voting for Barack Obama in 2012!